Richard Simon, RCC, lays textual criticism unbelief groundwork - "textual critics are like book-worms — devoid of light and conscience ... "

Steven Avery

Steven Avery

Administrator
Bryan Ross
https://business.facebook.com/bryan...DUrdpuBk4aWKCibWNJnh7woL3LLNMCwVYtXJZd9BpTgxl

Did you know the modern view of Scripture has Catholic roots?
🤔

In the video below, we explore how a 17th-century Catholic priest's arguments against sola scriptura laid the groundwork for modern textual criticism. Some key points:
• Richard Simon (1682) claimed only lost originals were inspired, not copies.
• This undermined Protestant reliance on Scripture alone.
• 200 years later, Protestant scholars adopted similar views.
• Textual criticism replaced Catholic Church tradition as the new authority.
• The 1881 Revised Version shook faith in Bible inerrancy.
What does this mean for how we view Scripture today?

The Review of the Revised Version In the July-October 1881 Dublin Review (Conference Follow-Up)
https://business.facebook.com/bryan...DUrdpuBk4aWKCibWNJnh7woL3LLNMCwVYtXJZd9BpTgxl
 
Last edited:
Steven Avery

Steven Avery

Administrator
There were many who opposed Richard Simon, both in general and on the heavenly witnesses.

Friedrich Ernst Kettner – many reasons theorized for omission, Vulgate Prologue flip
https://purebibleforum.com/index.ph...mission-vulgate-prologue-flip.1349/#post-6892

Richard Simon Answered by

Thomas Smith -English RGA
John Mill - RGA
Kettner - RGA
Martianay - is position given RGA?
Calamy - ENGLISH - RGA
Martin - ENGLISH - RGA
Smallbrook-Smallbroke
Pfaff - one tiny ref about Brittanicus RGA

Ittigius - not in RGA
https://books.google.com/books?id=76XVGL2PyJsC&pg=PA231

Maius - Majus - not in RGA
http://books.google.com/books?id=9jBBAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA221

Bishop Bull and
Grabe
Mesnard
Taylor 1727

Gerhard - only mentioned in this quote from Jonathan Edwards
and if you have a mind to know more of this matter, without going any further, you may peruse what Mr. Poole in his Synopsis hath quoted out of Gerhard, Dr. Hammond and other Writers in vindication of this Text

and others .. who does Grantley omit?
https://books.google.com/books?id=BLgQAAAAIAAJ&pg=RA1-PA26

Burgess
http://books.google.com/books?id=m6sGAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA86

Champion

https://pure.royalholloway.ac.uk/portal/files/880277/Champion_FORCE2.pdf

LeClerc

Boucat
Burnett
Blackall Blackhall
Stillingfleet
Jonathan Edwards

Thomas Firmin
 
Last edited:
Steven Avery

Steven Avery

Administrator
Facebook - Pure Bible
https://www.facebook.com/groups/purebible/permalink/1860005970757950/?comment_id=2056358134456065
textual critics are like bookworms

==================================

Thuesen reports it but puts in propaganda

In Discordance with the Scriptures (2002)
Peter Johannes Thuesen
https://books.google.com/books?id=Parz1Sxd8BsC&pg=PA63

Some changes clearly went over the edge: the Dublin Review assailed the Revised Version’s omission of the Trinitarian proof-text in 1 John 5:7, which translators since the sixteenth century had recognized as a late addition but refused until 1881 to remove from the Bible. The excision of this so-called Comma Johanneum proved to the Review's editors that

textual critics were like bookworms: “devoid of light and conscience, following the blind instincts of their nature, they will make holes in the most sacred of books.”83

Note the Theusen stupidity:

1748431276105.png



==================================
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top